Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Chee (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. This is the second AFD for this article subject in one month. Let's not see it recreated and back on AFD in a couple of weeks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Chee

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Still fails WP:GNG as refs don't pass WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Malaysia. UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Peter Chee is ranked #2 globally by Global Gurus (2023) and was named to the inaugural Coaches50 list by Thinkers50. Both these platforms are independent, reputable authorities in executive coaching. He has co-authored books with Jack Canfield, Brian Tracy, and Marshall Goldsmith, and is featured in major media including The Star and CNN Philippines. The article cites independent, verifiable sources. It meets notability guidelines under WP:BIO and WP:CORP and should be "KEEP". User:CS Aaron 08:27, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"I" and "V" are only two parts. Please read WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Was just at a previous AFD a few days ago so it is ineligible for another Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:35, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely looks like a grifter with no meaningful contribution to the coaching profession. All "sources" are PR driven. 178.23.206.26 (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article. No significant coverage in any reliable sources other than fluffy executive profiles. N3rsti (talk) 09:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP the article. All sources are clearly verified and credible. His contributions to thought leadership through original coaching models and internationally recognized certifications are substantial and well-documented. Collaborations with top-tier coaches and recognition by global rankings should not be discounted simply because the subject operates outside more traditionally covered geographies. This article clearly meets notability guidelines under WP:BIO and WP:CORP and should be KEPT. User:CS Aaron (talk) 02:12, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A note to the closing admin that this is the same user as the first to respond in this AFD. Izno (talk) 03:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP What is the fuss? The references are there, the sources are credible, the people who work with him are real; they’re not suing him for using their name, and the work produced in executive coaching is documented and accessible. Good to see Asian contributions in this field. This article should be KEPT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:3800:8FF:B14B:6948:C9D0:AF83:46DB (talk) 09:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC) [reply]
I suspect this IP is actually CS Aaron. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I have stricken the IP comment accordingly. Izno (talk) 03:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as the person has received media coverage in presumably Asian countries, CNN Vietnam, etc. to meet GNG. --Antônia Tônia (talk) 10:41, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Self-published and/or unreliable sources, many are tangent and do not concern with the subject leaving actual number of sources to be too thin, if any, to meet notability. WeWake (talk) 21:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could we get some source analysis, please?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~KEEP.~~ Curious how The Star, Thinkers50, McGraw Hill, and ICF all suddenly became “unreliable” when covering an Asian coach. They’re established, independent sources with global credibility. Dr. Chee has co-authored with Goldsmith, Canfield, and Tracy. He’s been ranked #2 in the world by Global Gurus and listed by Thinkers50. That’s significant, independent recognition. How are those fluff? Notability isn't limited to coverage in U.S. or U.K. media. This meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. ~~KEEP.~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by CS Aaron (talk • contribs) 07:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You previously !voted, CS Aaron. You don't get to !vote multiple times. Please strike your !vote. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Asilvering, attempted this below:

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Links to itdworld.com [16, 21,22]	WP:COI.		Primary src.	✘ No
Co-authored by the subject [3,5,12,14,16,23-26]		Primary sources; vanity press, etc		✘ No
[7,10]	Interview/blogs	WP:SPS	About the subject	✘ No
[15]	Written by the subject		Not about the subject.	✘ No
[6]	Likely self-submitted (WP:ABOUTSELF).	Not a reliable, third-party source.		✘ No
[2, 8, 9, 10] Promotional ranking & marketing or services sites	Promotional in nature.			✘ No
[1] and other Thinkers50 lists.		Thinkers50 is a reputable organization.	Just a name on a list	✘ No
[4, 19] (Forbes, PGA articles) etc.	~	Failed WP:V	Not even mentioned / bogus citation	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

— WeWake (talk) 22:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WeWake's assessment seems accurate; I have checked some of the sources to verify that. I have stuck CS Aaron's second !vote for them, and I suspect the IP that !voted above is also Aaron, so that comment should be discounted. Toadspike [Talk] 11:53, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete source analysis clearly shows WP:BIO is not met. LibStar (talk) 01:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.